Where's Bin Laden?

Where is Osama bin Laden? CNN turned to its experts for the elusive answer to that question and this, apparently, is the best they could do.

Makes you wonder who these experts are and what their particular area of expertise happens to be, doesn't it?

(This is what happens when you pay more attention to getting a headline ticker on the air than what it actually says. It happens to all news broadcasts sooner or later.)

The photo was posted by BigBrainBoy, whose blog can be found here (non-AOL).

"Decent" News

Last Veterans Day, sixty-six ABC affiliates across the country refused to air Saving Private Ryan over fears that they would be vulnerable to severe fines from the FCC because of the movie's profanity and violent images. (ABC was contractually obligated to air the movie in its entirety without any editing.)

At the time, a watchdog group called the Parents Television Council, which reportedly has been behind as much as 99% of the complaints about indecency received by the FCC, gave its approval of the movie's airing, profanity, violence and all.

But just because the PTC decided not to complain (assuming they didn't change their mind), that didn't stop others from doing so. And now the FCC, which has found itself buried in such complaints since it began revamping indecency guidelines (and attracting the attention of every overly-sensitive prude that is willing to come out of the woodwork long enough to whine about sitting through some terrible program rather than simply changing the channel), has had its say:

An item in The Hollywood Reporter (no direct link available; registration required) quoted FCC sources who said that the commission is preparing to deny those complaints. That has to make ABC and the affiliates that actually aired the movie breathe a sigh of relief.

But while the Parents Television Council was ignoring 'Ryan,' they were keeping themselves occupied, gluing themselves to televisions to watch programs they feel no one should watch because their subject matter is so offensive. (Ironic, isn't it?)

Also recently acted upon by the FCC is a stack of thirty-six PTC complaints about episodes of television programs that have aired between October 29, 2001 and February 11, 2004. Episodes of Dawson's Creek, NYPD Blue, and Boston Public were criticized by the group for their use of a pejorative word that could be interpreted as a synonym for "jerk." The four letter word in question is also the first name of our current Vice President. Episodes of Will & Grace, Friends, and Scrubs were among several other series targeted for discussing sexual matters.

The Washington Times (no direct link available) reported Monday that the FCC is also dismissing those complaints, after concluding that "in context, none of the segments were patently offensive under contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium, and thus not indecent." The commission also found that the material was "not profane, in context," according to a statement issued from the agency.

This is more good news for broadcasters in that they won't face fines for the programs in question. But it's bad news, too, because it further confuses the issue of what is and isn't offensive.

Lawmakers are again ready to discuss the possibility of raising fines for broadcasters and performers, according to both sources. (Washington Times link is here.) The latest proposal would not only increase the maximum fine for a broadcast licensee from the current $27,500 to $500,000, but would also increase the maximum fines for individual performers from the current $11,000 to $500,000. It would also repeal a portion of the current law that allows the FCC to issue a warning on the first violation. Seems a little unfair to me, especially when there is still no clear-cut guidelines about what will or won't incur such a high fine.

As always, it comes down to an issue of what is offensive to you. There are plenty of shows on television that I think cross the line at some point. Shows that deal with topics I don't want to see depicted are shows I don't watch. What a concept!

There are lots of channels out there, and some of them actually have decent programming that hardly ever offends anyone. But you'll notice that PBS is never at the top of the Nielsen ratings. I wonder why.

Goodbye, Johnny

"Never continue in a job you don't enjoy. If you're happy in what you're doing, you'll like yourself, you'll have inner peace. And if you have that, along with physical health, you will have had more success than you could possibly have imagined."
- Johnny Carson

Legendary entertainer Johnny Carson has died from emphysema, according to MSNBC.

Carson grew up in Nebraska and began his broadcasting career in radio. He hosted early game shows on television, including "Who Do You Trust?" (where his sidekick was Ed McMahon) and made appearances on "I've Got a Secret" and "What's My Line?" After serving as a writer for Red Skelton, he got the job that would make him a household name for decades: he succeeded Jack Paar as host of "The Tonight Show," NBC's late night variety show.

Taking the reins of 'Tonight,' in 1962, Carson proved himself to be a great interviewer, witty comedian and lovable character actor. He was introduced as host to the audience by Groucho Marx, Carson's very first guest. In 1991, he shocked NBC station executives at the annual affiliates meeting by announcing that he planned to retire the following year. His final guest, Bette Midler, sang "One More For the Road," and Carson was visibly moved by the tribute.

On his final show, broadcast in May of 1992, Carson told a VIP audience that he'd like to go back and do the whole thing over again. The remark produced loud cheers from his audience, and undoubtedly, the home audience who tuned in to see a farewell they hoped would never happen. That final episode, which featured clips and reminiscences rather than in-studio guests, reached an audience of 50 million. After more than 29 years, he left the stage for the last time, setting a record of hosting the same show on the same network that has only been broken by Bob Barker on "The Price is Right."

Carson was inducted into the Television Hall of Fame in 1987. In 1992, he received the Presidential Medal of Freedom. President George Bush said of Carson:

"With a quick wit and a sure golf swing, Johnny's good-natured humor kept the pulse of the Nation, and assured us that even in the most difficult times, it was still okay to laugh."

That same year, he received the American Comedy Lifetime Achievement Award. In 1993, he was honored with the Kennedy Center Honors Lifetime Achievement Award.

Since his retirement, he refused all requests for appearances and interviews, living out his later years with his wife in an intensely private setting. He made only one on-camera television appearance after leaving "The Tonight Show:" in May, 1994, he made a surprise cameo to congratulate his friend David Letterman on the start of his new show at CBS.

The memories from Carson's show are endless. I haven't been able to watch Jay Leno's "Tonight Show" for any length of time because it just isn't "Tonight" without Johnny Carson. I think it's time to pull out the Johnny Carson boxed set I own and laugh for a while. As Bob Hope would have said, "Thanks for the memories."

Is This All That We Are?

The benefit concert aired on the networks of NBC to help victims of the Tsunami seems to have been a victim itself...of low ratings.

It's surprising, really, because with everyone being so critical of the government's initial pledge of monetary support, I thought sure the ratings would soar as everyone took it upon themselves to make up for the government's slack. One might expect that nearly 40-45% of voters (those who most certainly did not give President Bush any form of mandate) would have watched if for no other reason to spite "Dubya." Odd.

AP reported that initial reports from Nielsen showed that less than six million people watched the concert, a tenth of the number that watched a similar effort for September 11th victims.

Perhaps it's indicative of a problem with our great society that has less to do with who's in the White House and Red and Blue states; perhaps it's simply that after all these years as a supposed superpower, we still don't worry about things that don't happen in our own backyard.

That would be sad...but not very surprising.

Words He Lived By

"And I submit to you that if a man has not discovered something that he will die for, he isn't fit to live."
- June 23, 1963. Speech at the Great March on Detroit


"Now, I say to you today my friends, even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: - 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal.'"
- August 28. 1963. Speech at Washington Civil Rights March


"On some positions, Cowardice asks the question, "Is it safe?" Expediency asks the question, "Is it politic?" And Vanity comes along and asks the question, "Is it popular?" But Conscience asks the question "Is it right?" And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right."
- Attributed to MLK


"In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends."
- Attributed to MLK

Disappearing From Store Shelves

As if the Celebrex controversy wasn't enough for them, Pfizer is now dealing with another problem, this time regarding Listerine: correcting a claim that some probably suspected was bogus to begin with!

According to the Associated Press, (via Yahoo) Pfizer will spend $2 million to replace advertising a judge called "misleading."

About 4,000 workers will be dispatched across the country to place stickers over the claim on Listerine bottles that using the antiseptic product is as effective to preventing plaque and gingivitis as flossing. The company is also pulling print and media ads that make the same claim. Did anyone really believe that was true?

I find it a rather amusing picture: imagine walking down the health and beauty aisle and suddenly being surrounded by a labcoat-clad militia, armed with stickers. They quickly spring to action near the mouthwash, to help insure you'll have healthier teeth and gums.

Even with the rapid response team, Pfizer faces another legal threat from Johnson & Johnson subsidiary McNeil-PPC Inc., whose claim to fame is the dental floss the "misleading" ads may have harmed.

Dentists everywhere must be rejoicing. Maybe this is a good week to try to make an appointment: you know, if you want to try to catch yours in a good mood?

That's Gross! I'm Suing!

Another frivolous lawsuit: a viewer is suing NBC for $2.5 million, contending that he threw up because of a "Fear Factor" episode in which contestants ate rats mixed in a blender, according to a report from Yahoo News. (No direct link available.)

The article goes on to say that Austin Aitken told The Associated Press he watches "Fear Factor" often and had no problem with past installments where the reality show's participants ate worms and insects in pursuit of a $50,000 prize but eating rats went "too far."

"It's barbaric, some of the things they ask these individuals to do," Aitken said Thursday. Aitken's handwritten lawsuit contends the rat-eating made his blood pressure rise, resulting in being dizzy and lightheaded and vomiting. Because he was disoriented he ran into a doorway, "causing suffering, injury and great pain."

But he just said that he had no problem with past installments; how can he complain about how "barbaric" those things are if they've never bothered him before?

Aitken says he couldn't shut off his television quickly enough to avoid seeing the segment. (I saw the show, and it went on for several minutes. Unless he and his television set were in different counties, he should have had plenty of time.)

NBC, meanwhile, responded with a statement: "We believe that the claim is completely without merit."

Aitken, a 49-year-old part-time paralegal, said he wants to send a message to NBC and other networks with the lawsuit. He said he isn't concerned with winning a cash judgment in court. "I just put any figure. You really think I expect to get $2.5 million?" he said.

What message are networks really supposed to get from this? The person suing is apparently a regular viewer of a program whose goal seems to be to gross out as many people as possible. Does anyone believe that this viewer is just trying to send a message, or trying to make a profit? If his system is so sensitive, I would imagine that countless episodes prior to this specific episode would have set him off. If nothing he's seen on this show has affected him prior to this single episode, it's highly doubtful that he is easily offended!

He's lucky I'm not the judge.

The Day After The Big Day

Thanks to those who kept me in their prayers or who thought of me yesterday as I had my surgery. Things seemed to have gone very well, ad I'm in a lot less discomfort than I expected.

The anesthetic was quite effective: after the procedure, my surgeon visited with me in recovery and I am reliably informed by the recovery room nurse and my dad who was also present that he and I had a conversation. A few minutes after the surgeon left, I distinctly remember asking whether he was going to come check on me or not. The nurse and my dad thought that was quite funny, and they reminded me that I'd just had a conversation with him! (I still don't remember it!)

The one thing I vaguely recall him saying -- as well as a couple of people who have had surgery in the past have said -- is that I shouldn't try to be a "hero." If I'm having pain, I should take the pain medication he prescribed: that's why he prescribed it. Believe me: you'll never see me hoping out of a phone booth wearing a cape and tights. When it hurts bad enough, I'm definitely going to pop a pill.

But I just wanted to let you know I survived the procedure and I should be back to a more regular posting pattern within a few days.

Thanks again for your concern.

The Journal Challenge

This challenge has been going around J-land, and it was sent to me by Jellogirli, so I thought I'd give it a shot.

1. What did you do in 2004 that you'd never done before?
Visited a specialist, scheduled a surgical procedure, fretted over a birthday, took my first antidepressant. (Not necessarily in that order.)

2. Did you keep your New Year's resolutions, and will you make more for next year?
Didn't really make any, except to lose some weight. Though I didn't lose as much as I wanted to, I am still entering 2005 lighter than I was when I entered 2004.

3. Did anyone close to you give birth?
Not in 2004; My Godson was born in December of 2003. (I doubt his mom would have wanted to wait just to make New Year's!)

4. Did anyone close to you die?
No. I have been very fortunate in my life that most of the relatives I've grown up with are still around, albeit in their 60s and 70s now. A few are in their 80s and I have the definite sense that time is beginning to run out.

5. What countries did you visit?
None.

6. What would you like to have in 2005 that you lacked in 2004?
Cash. Lots of it.

7. What dates from 2004 will remain etched upon your memory, and why?
10/2: My parents' 40th Anniversary.

8. What was your biggest achievement of the year?
Losing weight, although I didn't lose as much as I wanted.

9. What was your biggest failure?
Letting anxiety get the best of me far too many times.

10. Did you suffer illness or injury?
See answer for #1.

11. What was the best thing you bought?
I really don't know any one thing I bought that stood out that much. I'll let you know if I come up with something.

12. Whose behavior merited celebration?
* Our soldiers who went willingly to battle overseas and made sacrifices.
* People like Scott who do the dirty work to keep the rest of us from dying mostly because of our own stupidity
Tom Brokaw, a class-act journalist who left on his own terms while he was at the top of the heap.
* Michael Phelps who won the gold and shattered records in the Olympics to become an American role model.

13. Whose behavior made you appalled and depressed?
* John Kerry, who should have had an easy task in convincing us why things could be better, but who got so bogged down in trying to be the war hero and the "anyone but Bush" selection that he failed to talk about real issues often enough to win an election that was his to lose. Any of the spoiled, rich twenty-somethings and they're probably on my list.
* Michael Phelps, who got pulled for drunk driving and screwed up the role model image.
* And those family members of soldiers killed in action in Iraq who spoke out in anger, thereby turning the spotlight away from those who were lost and toward those who wanted to capitalize on their own loved ones' deaths for their own political agenda.

14. Where did most of your money go?
Toward paying off bills.

15. What did you get really, really, really excited about?
Nothing really. I lead a boring life.

16. What song will always remind you of 2004?
"100 Years." I told you I fretted over the birthday!

17. Compared to this time last year, you are:
Better off in most ways.

18. What do you wish you'd done more of?
Saving money.

19. What do you wish you'd done less of?
Spending money.

20. How will you be spending Christmas?
With family and friends.

21. How would you rather be spending Christmas?
That's how I most like to spend it.

22. Did you fall in love in 2004?
Yeah, right.

23. How many one-night stands?
You must have me confused with someone else.

24. What was your favorite TV program?
"The Price is Right"

25. Do you hate anyone now that you didn't hate this time last year?
I don't hate anyone. There are plenty of people with whom I'd rather not share a planet, but I don't hate.

26. What was the best book you read?
"Odd Thomas" by Dean Koontz

27. What was your greatest musical discovery?
That I still can't carry a tune with a bucket?

28. What did you want and get?
A DVD Recorder

29. What did you want and not get?
An Apple IBook

30. What was your favorite film of this year?
I didn't really see any new ones this year that jump out at me.

31. What did you do on your birthday, and how old were you?
I worked on my birthday; I took myself to Outback on the Saturday after my birthday.

32. What one thing would have made your year immeasurably more satisfying?
Not having anxiety disorder.

33. How would you describe your personal fashion concept in 2004?
Business casual.

34. What kept you sane?
Sometimes I wonder...

35. Which celebrity/public figure did you fancy the most?
Hmm...still thinking on this one.

36. What political issue stirred you the most?
The ever-increasing chasm between Republicans and Democrats and each side's refusal to even look for common ground. (There's plenty out there if they'd just open their eyes.)

37. Who did you miss?
My best friends who moved to Florida.

38. Who was the best new person you met?
Jeremy, a friend of mine; and a few folks who are members of a support group for us anxious folk.

39. Tell us a valuable life lesson you learned in 2004:
That no matter where you go, there you are.

The Tsunami's Aftermath

The latest death toll from the tsunami could reach 150,000. That's just a staggering number, almost impossible to comprehend. It's a tragedy that makes September 11th pale in comparison; one that makes the losses in Iraq almost seem minor for a moment or two.

But like all things, politics eventually rears its ugly head. And I'm not sure I understand the logic I'm seeing from some of those arguing about assistance for tsunami victims.

There are plenty of people who vehemently oppose the War in Iraq. Many more of us have doubts about why we're there and how much longer we should stay. For the longest time, two of the most popular stances for those who have opposed the war have been:

1. We should not be spending so much money overseas when we have real problems here at home.

and

2. We should not be willing to put up so much capital for a country that by and large doesn't want us there, to begin with.

Those are two interesting points of view, and I can certainly see merit to both arguments. But if you honestly believe either, you should find yourself on shaky ground when you complain about the amount of relief this country has promised thus far for those victims.

We still have problems here at home, including people in Florida who are still trying to recover from the devastating effects of a series of hurricanes. We have myriad non-storm-related issues as well, each of which will likely cost money to solve. If you believe position #1 with regard to Iraq, does this not also mean that we should ignore the victims half a world away?

To say that some of the countries affected by the tsunami have a dubious opinion of the United States would be an understatement! Should their opinion of us keep us from contributing? Should we question their motives if they take our assistance in a time of need, then end up disliking us as much or even more than they did before that time of need?

I understand that people don't like the concept of war and that we are losing American lives in a battle that is largely unpopular. There are some people who will find fault with everything the current administration does, no matter what position it takes.

If the Bush administration had initially pledged $150 Billion dollars to relief efforts rather than the $15 million figure, many Bush critics would have complained that he's bankrupting the country to help people who don't want us there any more than Iraqis do. They complain that Bush isn't sending enough money from the government, yet has the audacity to encourage private individuals to contribute. Ever heard of the Red Cross or the Salvation Army? Private donations for relief efforts isn't some evil conspiracy concocted by George and Dick.

How can you put a price tag on the efforts of these groups who will spend their own time and resources donated by individuals? How can you put a price tag on the efforts of those our government sends to help? How can you be sure that the initial figure represents even a fraction of what we will eventually have contributed when all is said and done?

It's not about the money, it's about the man in the White House. And I think that when you look at a death toll that is still rising, in countries that may not ever be able to tabulate a true count of the losses, it's a shame that political bickering can steal the spotlight from the human toll.